Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Qt Developers Work Out Plans For Time-Based Releases

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,782

    Default Qt Developers Work Out Plans For Time-Based Releases

    Phoronix: Qt Developers Work Out Plans For Time-Based Releases

    Following the Qt 5.0 release, developers of this open-source tool-kit will aim to issue feature updates on a six-month cycle...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTE1NTM

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    224

    Default

    inb4 FUNKstar or w/e he is called comes and trolls here too...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Time-based released are the most stupid thing to do for projects (except Linux but this is a little bit diffrent, in Linux there is just to much changes to make plan of release). You should release your product when you have something to show and it is working not when calendar is telling you. And fix-releases (like 5.0.x) should be released when you have something to fix (I found big bug in Qt, why I need wait 2 month for next release?).

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    34

    Default

    I wonder if Nokia are hoping they'll continue to work for free after being laid off?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MatthewPL View Post
    Time-based released are the most stupid thing to do for projects (except Linux but this is a little bit diffrent, in Linux there is just to much changes to make plan of release). You should release your product when you have something to show and it is working not when calendar is telling you.
    There are two issues that make time-based releases useful:

    1. They help downstream plan. Especially for a central component like Qt, knowing when to expect a release will help downstream developers plan their own releases.

    2. They makes sure releases actually happen. You are unlikely to get something like Firefox used to be where they once went a year and a half between major releases, not to mention something like MythTV or grub.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MatthewPL View Post
    Time-based released are the most stupid thing to do for projects (except Linux but this is a little bit diffrent, in Linux there is just to much changes to make plan of release). You should release your product when you have something to show and it is working not when calendar is telling you.
    Your comment is the most stupid thing. In distributed source code management systems (like git) every feature is worked on a separate branch and only merged when it's ready. So no calender is telling anyone when a feature is ready.
    Feature-based releases are totally unfair. A feature can be fully completed but an unfinished feature can postpone a release indefinitely.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,047

    Default Wayland

    How is Wayland support shaping up in Qt?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    91

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by philcostin View Post
    I wonder if Nokia are hoping they'll continue to work for free after being laid off?
    Nokia couldn't care less. They don't need it anymore.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Koszalin, Poland
    Posts
    131

    Default

    I'm not too fond of time based releases too. Many projects that switched to time based releases have really dropped in stability and increased amount of bugs. The big gorilla in the room is Ubuntu which gets more and more known not-fixed issues in the release notes, but it's released on time cause that's more important then getting it to work right. I hope Qt will not fall down this path.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 0xCAFE View Post
    Nokia couldn't care less. They don't need it anymore.
    True. That is after Nokia decided to dominate the Microsoft phone market rather than the global phone market. Now, according to the rating agencies, Nokia is junk. Let us forget about them and move on.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •